Commissioner of Income Tax-21 Versus Savitridevi Ringshia

2015 (7) TMI 410 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Accrual of income - amount received under an interim order - Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the entire addition of the amount received by virtue of an interim order of the Court and is not accrued to the assessee - Held that:- What has happened in Karnataka High Court decision in the case of CIT v/s Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd. [1989 (11) TMI 33 - KARNATAKA High Court] is that the assessee was permitted to collect the amount in question only .....

st the revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 1060 of 2008 - Dated:- 29-6-2015 - M. S. Sanklecha And N. M. Jamdar, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Suresh Kumar along with N A Kazi For the Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Toprani a/with Ms. Keyuri Desai ORDER P. C. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 28 January 2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). This appeal is in respect of Assessment Year 1998-99. 2. Mr.Suresh Kumar, learned .....

ion. The respondent-assessee had some disputes with Bombay Municipal Corporation (B.M.C.) in respect of a contract awarded to her by the B.M.C. In view of the dispute, the B.M.C. terminated the contract and refused to make the payment to the respondent-assessee. This resulted in the respondent filing a suit in the City Civil Court for recovery of its dues. The City Civil Court by order dated 6 May 1997 passed an interim order directing the B.M.C. to make payment of ₹ 1.04 crores to the res .....

come of the assessee as there is yet no absolute right to receive the amounts. The Tribunal further records that the B.M.C. had also filed a counterclaim and it was likely that the respondent-assessee would have to pay more than what has been given to her by the interim order. In the above view, the Tribunal placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of C.I.T. v/s Hindustan Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd., reported in 161 ITR 524 (SC) to hold that no income had ac .....

in Assessment Year 1998-99. 6. Mr.Toprani, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee while placing reliance on the decision of Hindustan Housing (supra) and also places reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of C.I.T. v/s Saksaria Biswan Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd., reported in 195 ITR 778, wherein following the Apex Court decision, this Court has observed as under : 4. In response to a query from the Bench, Shri Trivedi, learned counsel for the assessee, stated that, after p .....

55 : (1990) 183 ITR 113 (Kar.), Shri Trivedi reiterated that the extra amount received by the assessee was subject to several conditions. The amount was made available to the assessee on a bank guarantee and was to be refunded if the assessee lost in the writ petition. It was stated that, both the Andhra Pradesh and the karnataka High Courts, in identical circumstances, took the view that the amounts so received did not accrue to the assessee as its income until the finalization of the dispute. .....